UK outlines three ‘tiers’ of military drones

The Defence Committee of the House of Commons recently discussed the complex aspects of the UK’s approach towards unmanned aerial systems.

Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton outlined the classification of drone technologies into three tiers, underscoring the prioritisation of Tier 1 drones for their cost-effectiveness and expendable nature. He highlighted the operational focus on these small, inexpensive platforms to augment the combat air fleet’s survivability and lethality.

Knighton noted the lessons being incorporated into UK defence strategies, especially the employment of Tier 1 drones for electronic warfare to neutralise enemy air defences.

Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton:

“I will answer on Mosquito first. That was a really good example of investment in innovation and learning, which was extracted from it at the point where we decided that we would not continue with the programme, because we had learned as much as we needed to and needed to think about how we pivoted to the next phase of our development.

In terms of our thinking around the strategy for uncrewed systems and what we call autonomous collaborative platforms, we think of them in the context of cost versus capability. We broadly put them into three brackets. Tier 1 is small, much cheaper, so probably several orders of magnitude cheaper than a crewed platform capability—we are talking hundreds of thousands of pounds; we judge those to be completely disposable and we would not expect them to come back from a mission.

Tier 2 is described as attritable, so we would expect them to come back sometimes. We could tolerate losses, but clearly, as it gets more expensive, the economics of that model shift. Then, tier 3 is for platforms that we would expect to be completely survivable and we would want them to come back all at the same time. That is similar-ish to some of the work that was done under a programme called Taranis some 15-plus years ago.

Our analysis shows, in terms of the cost-benefit between what operational benefit you get and the cost of those platforms, that our first focus should be on those tier 1 platforms. Quite a lot of the work we have been doing over the last few years has led us to that conclusion and some of that technology. I anticipate having a usable operational capability within a year that can work alongside our current combat air fleet and improve their survivability, certainly, and potentially their lethality.

In the circumstances, what I think we will see first will be smaller drones that include electronic warfare packages that enable us to suppress enemy air defences and allow our Typhoons, for example, to get through a threat or get closer to a target. We are learning a lot from the experience we are seeing Ukraine and Russia have in the war in Ukraine and trying to take that knowledge, expertise, the advice we are providing and the information and intelligence we are gathering and applying that in that way.

In the first instance, it will be those tier 1 capabilities. As we develop our understanding of the operational concepts—how we would employ them and what those platforms might do—that will teach us more about where the price point is that makes sense.

To give you some examples, the Americans have just announced five contracts for what they call collaborative combat air, which is similar to our autonomous collaborative platforms, where they are putting aside $5.8 billion across five platforms over the next few years to evolve that thinking. We will see where their analysis takes them and our analysis takes us in terms of where we go next. Right now, however, small drones—and as I say, within a year I expect to see us being able to employ them operationally.

There are a number of other issues I could talk about in terms of certification, but hopefully that gives you an indication.”